Committee Report

Report text available as:

Calendar No. 334
105th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 105-173
_______________________________________________________________________
NEXT GENERATION INTERNET RESEARCH ACT OF 1998
__________
R E P O R T
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
on
S. 1609
April 2, 1998.--Ordered to be printed
SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
one hundred fifth congress
second session
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, South Carolina
CONRAD BURNS, Montana DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
SLADE GORTON, Washington WENDELL H. FORD, Kentucky
TRENT LOTT, Mississippi JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas Virginia
OLYMPIA SNOWE, Maine JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts
JOHN ASHCROFT, Missouri JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana
BILL FRIST, Tennessee RICHARD H. BRYAN, Nevada
SPENCER ABRAHAM, Michigan BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas RON WYDEN, Oregon
John Raidt, Staff Director
Mark Buse, Policy Director
Ivan A. Schlager, Democratic Chief Counsel and Staff Director
James S.W. Drewry, Democratic General Counsel
Calendar No. 334
105th Congress Report
SENATE
2d Session 105-173
_______________________________________________________________________
NEXT GENERATION INTERNET RESEARCH ACT OF 1998
_______
April 2, 1998.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mr. McCain, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1609]
The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to
which was referred the bill (S. 1609) ``A Bill to amend the
High-Performance Computing Act of 1991 to authorize
appropriations for fiscal years 1999 and 2000 for the Next
Generation Internet program, to require the Advisory Committee
on High-Performance Computing and Communications, Information
Technology, and the Next Generation Internet to monitor and
give advice concerning the development and implementation of
the Next Generation Internet program and report to the
President and the Congress on its activities, and for other
purposes'', having considered the same, reports favorably
thereon without amendment and recommends that the bill do pass.
Purpose of the Bill
The purpose of the bill is to authorize appropriations to the
following agencies for each of the fiscal years (FY) 1999 and
2000: Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Energy (DOE),
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), National
Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST), and National Science Foundation (NSF).
Background and Needs
The Internet is an international, cooperative computer
network of networks that links many types of users, such as
governments, schools, libraries, corporations, hospitals,
individuals and others. The United States has achieved national
strategic advantages and prominence as a result of American
leadership in information technology. Furthermore, U.S.
dominance in this field grew from critical federal investment,
and continued investment is necessary to maintain that
dominance and leadership. The explosion of business,
government, and academic uses of the Internet has led to a need
to overhaul the network infrastructure. Additional research
must be undertaken in order to develop new applications that
will improve educational access, while still contributing to
economic growth.
Federal efforts to support computer and telecommunications
applications and education have been strongly endorsed by the
Clinton Administration since 1993. In October 1996, President
Clinton called for a renewed resolve to create the Next
Generation Internet (NGI). However, the Administration's
proposal was redefined after Congressional concerns were
raised. Thus, the NGI Implementation Plan was completed in July
1997. The new proposal identified NGI as a research initiative
(rather than a deployment initiative) more clearly than in the
previous plan.
The NGI implementation plan combined both policy and program
prescriptions in three specific goals.
Goal 1: Experimental Research for Advanced Network
Technologies. Develop main areas of network service and
corresponding protocols including the following: end-to-end
Quality of Service (QoS), security and robustness, network
growth engineering, new or modified protocols for routing and
switching. Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA)
serves as the lead federal agency.
Goal 2: Next Generation Network Fabric. Develop a next
generation network testbed to connect universities and federal
research institutions at rates that are sufficient to
demonstrate new technologies and support future research. DOE
serves as the lead federal agency.
Goal 3: Revolutionary Applications. Demonstrate new
applications that meet important national goals and missions.
Potential areas for applications include: health care,
education, scientific research, national security, environment,
government, and design and manufacture.
In its FY 1998 budget request, the Administration requested
$100 million in funding for the NGI initiative. Although many
in Congress expressed support for the basic principles outlined
in the NGI plan, several concerns relating to implementation of
the plan remained and funding for the initiative was withheld.
The level of funding appropriated for FY 1998 was 10%-15% less
than the level of funding included in the President's budget
request.
The Next Generation Internet Research Act of 1998 would
advance the current state of the Internet, advance university
research capabilities, and assist federal agencies in achieving
their missions. The bill would provide for a multi-agency
program concentrated upon the research and development of a
coordinated set of technologies that seeks to create a network
infrastructure to support greater speed, robustness, and
flexibility beyond what is available in the current Internet.
Program Issues
Congressional apprehension exists regarding agency
participation in the NGI. Considering that the current Internet
was created byDOD with ARPANET in the 1970's and then further
developed by NSF in the mid-80's, there is some interest for continuing
that approach and allowing those two agencies to lead the NGI
initiative. In addition, the geographical penalty that exists in the
current Internet which imposes high costs on rural users and places
them at a distinct disadvantage has raised concerns that the original
plan's provisions for only a few select locations with enhanced
connectivity will only exacerbate that problem. Other Committee
concerns include issues such as: (1) the appropriate roles of the
federal and private sector regarding further research and development
of the Internet; (2) the avoidance of duplication and redundancy in
federal efforts across multiple agencies; and (3) the inconclusiveness
in the NGI planning process.
Legislative History
Two hearings have been held on the Next Generation Internet
during the 105th Congress. On June 3, 1997, the full committee
held a hearing, chaired by Senator McCain, on the Next
Generation Internet and the relevance of the NGI proposal.
Witnesses included representatives from the Office of Science
and Technology Policy, NSF, Rice University, Montana State
University, North Dakota State University, Oregon State
University, and Internet 2 Project. The Science, Technology,
and Space Subcommittee, chaired by Senator Frist, conducted a
second hearing on November 4, 1997, with representatives from
the Office of Science and Technology Policy, DOD, DOE, NSF,
Montana State University, University of Tennessee, and Cisco
Systems testifying. The Next Generation Internet Research Act
of 1998 was introduced on February 4, 1998, by Senator Frist
and Senator Rockefeller. The bill is co-sponsored by Senator
McCain, Senator Hollings, Senator Burns, and Senator Kerry.
On March 12, 1998, the Commerce Committee in open executive
session considered S. 1609 as introduced by Senator Frist and,
without objection, ordered S. 1609 to be reported without
amendments.
Estimated Costs
In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office:
U.S. Congress,
Congressional Budget Office,
Washington, DC, March 24, 1998.
Hon. John McCain,
Chairman, Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, U.S.
Senate, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for S. 1609, the Next
Generation Internet Research Act of 1998.
If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contacts are Kathleen
Gramp (for federal costs) and Pepper Santalucia (for the state
and local impact).
Sincerely,
June E. O'Neill, Director.
Enclosure.
congressional budget office cost estimate
S. 1609--Next Generation Internet Research Act of 1998
Summary: S. 1609 would authorize appropriations for 1999
and 2000 for a multiagency research initiative to advance the
speed, flexibility, and robustness of the Next Generation
Internet (NGI). The bill also would direct an existing federal
advisory committee to assess and report on various aspects of
the program's implementation. About 40 percent of the amounts
authorized each year would support programs at the Defense
Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) within the Department
of Defense. The remainder would be distributed among the
National Science Foundation, the Department of Energy, the
National Institutes of Health, the National Aeronautics and
Space Administration.
Assuming appropriation of the specified amounts, CBO
estimates that implementing S. 1609 would increase
discretionary spending by a total of $214 million over the
1999-2003 period. The legislation would not affect direct
spending or receipts; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures would
not apply. S. 1609 contains no intergovernmental or private-
sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
of 1995 (UMRA), and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: For the purposes
of this estimate, CBO assumes that the amounts authorized for
the NGI programs will be appropriated near the start of each
fiscal year and that outlays will follow the historical pattern
for similar activities. We assume that the activities of the
advisory committee will be funded from the amounts authorized
for DARPA, consistent with the current funding arrangement for
that advisory committee. The estimated budgetary impact of S.
1609 is shown in the following table. The costs of this
legislation fall within budget functions 050 (national
defense), 250 (general science, space, and technology), 370
(commerce and housing credit), and 550 (health).
[By fiscal year, in millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
NGI spending under current law:
Net budget authority 1 2........................ 60 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated outlays............................... 28 24 6 2 0 0
Proposed changes:
Authorization level............................. 0 103 115 0 0 0
Estimated outlays............................... 0 44 93 58 14 4
NGI spending under S. 1609:
Authorization level 1 2......................... 60 103 115 0 0 0
Estimated outlays............................... 28 68 99 60 14 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 1998 level is the amount appropriated for that year.
\2\ The National Science Foundation was authorized to spend up to $23 million on NGI in 1998 from amounts
collected from Internet Domain Registrations. Because the spending would be funded by offsetting collections,
the net budget authority for NSF's NGI activities in 1998 is zero.
Pay-as-you-go considerations: None.
Estimated impact on State, local, and tribal governments:
S. 1609 contains no intergovernmental mandates as defined in
UMRA, and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments. One of the goals of the NGI initiative is to
connect 100 sites at speeds 100 times faster than those of
today's Internet. Many of these sites would be publicly owned
universities. Some of the funds authorized to be appropriated
by this bill would be used for this purpose.
Estimated impact on the private sector: The bill would
impose no new private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA.
Estimate prepared by: Federal Costs: Kathleen Gramp; Impact
on State, local, and tribal governments: Pepper Santalucia.
Estimate approved by: Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
Regulatory Impact Statement
In accordance with paragraph 11(b) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides the
following evaluation of the regulatory impact of the
legislation, as reported.
number of persons covered
S. 1609, as reported, authorizes the appropriations for the
Next Generation Internet Research Act of 1998 for FY 1999 and
FY 2000.
economic impact
This legislation authorizes funding to ensure continuous
research and development of future Internet systems. Such
funding should support further U.S. commercialization of
technology. In addition the bill requires a report to the
President and Congress on the progress and effectiveness of
individual agency programs. This action will provide oversight
of agency programs and prevent unnecessary and costly
duplication of effort while promoting a more cost effective use
of Federal funds. The bill will not subject any individuals or
agencies affected by the bill to additional regulation.
privacy
This legislation will not have an adverse impact on the
personal privacy of individuals.
paperwork
This legislation requires the Advisory Committee on High-
Performance Computing and Communications, Information
Technology, and the Next Generation Internet to issue an annual
report to the President, the Senate Committee on Commerce,
Science and Transportation and House Committee on Science that
examines the progress and effectiveness of individual agency
programs and Next Generation Internet goals.
Section-by-Section Analysis
Section 1. Short title
This section cites the short title of the bill as the ``Next
Generation Internet Research Act of 1998.''
Section 2. Definitions
This section would define several terms, including Internet,
geographical penalty, and network.
Section 3. Findings
This section provides Congressional findings with regard to
the U.S. role and leadership in Science and Technology.
Specifically: (1) the United States has achieved national
strategic advantages and prominence as a result of American
leadership in information technology; (2) U.S. dominance in
this field grew from critical federal investment, and continued
investment is necessary to maintain and further American
leadership; (3) Federal investment in this area has created
both new jobs and new industries; (4) citizens are increasingly
relying on the Internet for information about and access to the
government; and (5) wasteful duplication of Federal research
efforts should be avoided through interagency cooperation.
This section also includes additional findings to the High-
Performance Computing Act of 1991. These findings say that: (1)
researchers and educators need a high-capacity, flexible, high-
speed network for access to computational and information
resources; (2) additional research must be undertaken in order
to develop new applications that will improve educational
access, while still contributing to economic growth; (3)
research in new networking technologies could benefit rural
areas and ease current economic burdens associated with
accessing information; and (4) information security is
important and research into this area is a critical component
of computing, information and communications research programs.
Section 4. Purpose
This section states the purposes of the legislation as being
twofold. First, this bill is the initial component in a series
of computing, information, and communications technology
initiatives outlined in the High-Performance Computing Act of
1991. Second, this legislation will focus on the research and
development of a coordinated set of technologies to create a
network infrastructure that will enable users to gain
economical high-speed data access with greater robustness and
flexibility.
Section 5. Duties of the advisory committee
This section would amend title I of the High-Performance
Computing Act to provide the Advisory Committee on High-
Performance Computing and Communications, Information
Technology, and the Next Generation Internet with additional
responsibilities to issue an annual report to the President,
the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation,
and House Committee on Science. The report would assess the
progress of the overall program including the extent to which
each participating agency's role is complementary and non-
duplicative of each other and would address concerns relating
to geographic penalties and technology transfers. The reporting
process shall be terminated September 30, 2000.
Section 6. Authorization of appropriations
This section authorizes funding for the research program
through FY 2000. The six agencies involved in FY 1999 are
authorized at individual levels including: DOD, $42,500,000;
DOE, $20,000,000; NSF, $25,000,000; NIH, $5,000,000; NASA,
$5,000,000; and NIST, $5,000,000. Funding levels for FY 2000
are: DOD, $45,000,000; DOE, $25,000,000; NSF, $25,000,000; NIH,
$7,500,000; NASA, $5,000,000; NIST, $7,500,000.
Changes in Existing Law
In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing
Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the Bill,
as reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be
omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new material is printed
in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown
in roman):
SEC. 2. FINDINGS. [15 U.S.C. 5501]
The Congress finds the following:
(1) Advances in computer science and technology are
vital to the Nation's prosperity, national and economic
security, industrial production, engineering, and
scientific advancement.
(2) The United States currently leads the world in
the development and use of high-performance computing
for national security, industrial productivity,
science, and engineering, but that lead is being
challenged by foreign competitors.
(3) Further research and development, expanded
educational programs, improved computer research
networks, and more effective technology transfer from
government to industry are necessary for the United
States to reap fully the benefits of high-performance
computing.
[(4) A high-capacity and high-speed national research
and education computer network would provide
researchers and educators with access to computer and
information resources and act as a test bed for further
research and development high-capacity and high-speed
computer networks.]
(4) A high-capacity, flexible, high-speed national
research and education computer network is needed to
provide researchers and educators with access to
computational and information resources, act as a test
bed for further research and development for high-
capacity and high-speed computer networks, and provide
researchers the necessary vehicle for continued network
technology improvement through research.
(5) Several Federal agencies have ongoing high-
performance computing programs, but improved long-term
interagency coordination, cooperation, and planning
would enhance the effectiveness of these programs.
(6) A 1991 report entitled ``Grand Challenges: High-
Performance Computing and Communications'' by the
Office of Science and Technology Policy, outlining
research and development strategy for high-performance
computing, provides framework for a multiagency high-
performance computing program. Such a program would
provide American researchers and educators with the
computer and information resources they need, and
demonstrate how advanced computers, high-capacity and
high-speed networks, and electronic data bases can
improve the national information infrastructure for use
by all Americans.
(7) Additional research must be undertaken to lay the
foundation for the development of new applications that
can result in economic growth, improved health care,
and improved educational opportunities.
(8) Research in new networking technologies holds the
promise of easing the economic burdens of information
access disproportionately borne by rural users of the
Internet.
(9) Information security is an important part of
computing, information, and communications systems and
applications, and research into security architectures
is a critical aspect of computing, information, and
communications research programs.
[SEC. 3. PURPOSE.] [15 U.S.C. 5502]
SEC. 3. PURPOSES.
The [purpose of this Act is] purposes of this Act are to help
ensure the continued leadership of the United States in high-
performance computing and its applications by--
(1) expanding Federal support for research,
development, and application of high-performance
computing in order to--
(A) establish a high-capacity and high-speed
National Research and Education network;
(B) expand the number of researchers,
educators, and students with training high-
performance computing and access to high-
performance computing resources;
(C) promote the further development of an
information infrastructure of databases,
services, access mechanisms, and research
facilities available for use through the
Network;
(D) stimulate research on software
technology;
(E) promote the more rapid development and
wider distribution of computing software tools
and applications software;
(F) accelerate the development of computing
systems and subsystems;
(G) provide for the application of high-
performance computing to Grand Challenges;
(H) invest in basic research and education,
and promote the inclusion of high-performance
computing into educational institutions at all
levels; and
(I) promote greater collaboration among
government, Federal laboratories, industry,
high-performance computing centers, and
[universities; and] universities;
(2) improving the interagency planning and
coordination of Federal research and development on
high-performance computing and maximizing the
effectiveness the Federal Government's high-performance
computing [efforts.] network research and development
programs;
(3) promoting the further development of an
information infrastructure of information stores,
services, access mechanisms, and research facilities
available for use through the Internet;
(4) promoting the more rapid development and wider
distribution of networking management and development
tools; and
(5) promoting the rapid adoption of open network
standards.
SEC. 4. DEFINITIONS. [15 U.S.C. 5503]
As used in this Act, the term--
(1) ``Director'' means the Director of the Office of
Science and Technology Policy;
(2) ``Grand Challenge'' means a fundamental problem
in science or engineering, with broad economic and
scientific impact, whose solution will require the
application of high-performance computing resources;
(3) ``high-performance computing'' means advanced
computing, communications, and information
technologies, including scientific workstations,
supercomputer systems (including vector supercomputers
and large scale parallel systems), high-capacity and
high-speed networks, special purpose and experimental
systems, and applications and systems software;
(4) ``Network'' means a computer [network referred to
as the National Research and Education Network
established under section 102; and] network, including
advanced computer networks of Federal agencies and
departments; and
(5) ``Program'' means the National High-Performance
Computing Program described in section 101.
* * * * * * *
SEC. 103. ADVISORY COMMITTEE.
(a) In General.--In addition to its functions under Executive
Order 13035 (62 F.R. 7231), the Advisory Committee on High-
Performance Computing and Communications, Information
Technology, and the Next Generation Internet, established by
Executive Order No. 13035 of February 11, 1997 (62 F.R. 7231)
shall--
(1) assess the extent to which the Next Generation
Internet program--
(A) carries out the purposes of this Act;
(B) addresses concerns relating to, among
other matters--
(i) geographic penalties (as defined
in section 2(2) of the Next Generation
Internet Research Act of 1998); and
(ii) technology transfer to and from
the private sector; and
(2) assess the extent to which--
(A) the role of each Federal agency and
department involved in implementing the Next
Generation Internet program is clear,
complementary to and non-duplicative of the
roles of other participating agencies and
departments; and
(B) each such agency and department concurs
with the role of each other participating
agency or department.
(b) Reports.--The Advisory Committee shall assess
implementation of the Next Generation Internet initiative and
report, not less frequently than annually, to the President,
the United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation, and the United States House of Representatives
Committee on Science on its findings for the preceding fiscal
year. The first such report shall be submitted 6 months after
the date of enactment of the Next Generation Internet Research
Act of 1998 the last report shall be submitted by September 30,
2000.
SEC. 104. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated for the purpose of
carrying out the Next Generation Internet program the following
amounts:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2000
Agency FY 1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Defense $42,500,000 $45,000,000
Department of Energy $20,000,000 $25,000,000
National Science Foundation $25,000,000 $25,000,000
National Institutes of Health $5,000,000 $7,500,000
National Aeronautics and Space
Administration $5,000,000 $5,000,000
National Institute of Standards
and Technology $5,000,000 $7,500,000.
------------------------------------------------------------------------